|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,788 Year: 4,045/9,624 Month: 916/974 Week: 243/286 Day: 4/46 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Winter: Baby, It's Cold Outside! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.4
|
Marc9K writes:
Yes. We have new records for carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. New records for global temps. Do you deny these? I was thinking more of local records. Temps in the U.S. They're more realistic and verifiable by the public, than are global temperatures claimed by a special interest. WHAT!!! so now decades of NASA data from satellites is a "special interest"? Why is your small intake valve focused only on the U.S.?Have you checked the more realistic and verifiable size of the USA on a globe lately? I bet you might even think eye-witness testimony is the best kind of evidence of these public local records. I am not the one claiming Democrats are trying to take control of all these things. That is your claim. Sorry, it really is your claim. Here is your quote;
quote: I do NOT see the Democrats in that quote.
I responded like this;
quote:and; quote: ok, so then later you do get to the part i can somewhat agree with:
ESSENTIAL; *Fuel for tractor trailers that haul food.*Fuel for farm equipment *Fuel to heat buildings *Fuel to build and repair roads *Oil that's required to make all kinds of plastic products, rubber products, building materials. *Oil for mining machinery fuels Barely scratching the surface, but you get the idea. Now forNON-ESSENTIAL; *Pleasure boats, from the biggest cruise ships to the tiniest fishing boats*All forms of auto racing *All forms of transportation to sporting events *Oil that's required for the manufacture of non-essential items, toys, sporting goods, the making of movies and entertainment shows. boy, that last item sure brings out the Grinch in you, doesn't it? i think the changes to renewable energies will take time and the CEOs who haven't already built up stock piles of alternate stocks will go the way of the horse and buggy whip industry."I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1522 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.3
|
I'll take that as an admission that you do not have actual evidence. I don't have actual evidence, no. But I do have a suspicion. There's no law (yet) from prohibiting people to have a suspicion about something, and sharing it with others, as an inspiration for thought. Suspicion is somewhat synonymous with mis-trust. If you've ever read the Bill of Rights, you might notice mis-trust there. As one example, if the German people would have been suspicious of Hitlers actions in the early and mid-1930's, they could have saved themselves a lot of misery 10 years later.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1522 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Bob Altemeyer constructed a Right-Wing Authoritarian (RWA) spectrum with sets of survey questions to place an individual on that scale. Also, "right wing" has nothing to do with politics, since even an extreme left-wing mentality could score high on the RWA scale. Couldn't you summarize it, condense it, and post it here rather than just saying to read an entire book? How long is the set of survey questions, couldn't you show us? Is the book only about Trump and January 6th? Does it contain an LWA spectrum also? Complete with questions about gun control? About the Green New Deal? About teachers unions?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1522 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
It seems to me that he is calling out a Democratic government for passing laws for the all-inclusive "good of the people." In short, an authoritarian government. Yes, it was Taq who brought up "laws". I wanted more clarification of what laws they were talking about. He responded to that with this;
quote: I suspect he was already bombed on his ass a full day before New Years eve. Who knows what kind of shape he's in now.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1522 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
What kind of laws would you suggest?Legislators have already suggested them, already debated them and already passed them. EXAMPLES? So climate change laws have been passed, and our troubles are over?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1522 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
WHAT!!! so now decades of NASA data from satellites is a "special interest"? Nasa is a special interest. It absorbs billions from the federal government each year. It also accepts donations. It's one of many special interests that can increase its cash flow using climate change hysteria.
Why is your small intake valve focused only on the U.S.? Because that's where I live, currently the biggest threat to the U.S. way of life is from within - the Democrat party. And it's $31+ trillion in debt.
Have you checked the more realistic and verifiable size of the USA on a globe lately? I bet you might even think eye-witness testimony is the best kind of evidence of these public local records. ?? Could you repeat that in English?
Taq writes: Why can't governments use laws to encourage the replacement of fossil fuels? Why won't this help? xongsmith writes: I do NOT see the Democrats in that quote. Not in gun control? Not in the Green New Deal?
ok, so then later you do get to the part i can somewhat agree with: boy, that last item sure brings out the Grinch in you, doesn't it? I never said that last item should be eliminated. If that list I made was way longer, it would always point out the same thing; that today's use of fossil fuels can't be switched off, or cut back in any meaningful way. Even the most non-essential fossil fuel use cut back would result in a public outcry, and a political jolt that no politician would want to see. I saw somewhere on the net the other night at a pro fission site that even if that kind of energy took off right now, it would be too little too late to stop climate change. Most of the mandates in the Green New Deal aren't going to happen. Everyone knows it, so why is climate change sensationalized in the news so much, if nothing meaningful can be done? The answer is, even if nothing meaningful can be done, there is always a FEEL GOOD measure that can be done. The idea is to target a very minority interest, one without much political ramification. It helps a lot if there's some jealousy of that minority interest. Every time there is a mass shooting that makes major news, the Democrat outcry is always the same, more gun control. Just one more law, one more step. It won't do anything to stop the next nutcase from getting a gun of course, but it makes some people feel good. "Something must be done!!" is always the Democrat battle cry. And there is some jealousy of people who enjoy shooting sports, or like the peace of mind they get from being able to protect themselves from crime. It's exactly the same with climate change. Can't ban this use of fossil fuels, can't ban that one, but SOMETHING must be done!! It always zeros in on one thing, old cars and trucks. Won't make any difference of course, but its SOMETHING. Users of older vehicles are in a small minority, don't have much political power, and the jealousy factor compares to that of anti-gun owners. Older vehicles are cost efficient to use, especially since they aren't loaded down with government regulations like newer ones are. Some, maybe not many, but some newer vehicle owners know that they pay more in the use of their new one, since they don't have the ability to maintain an older one and keep it running. They're not the only ones that would take pleasure in seeing older vehicles restricted or banned, but lobbyists for new vehicle companies would love to see those kinds of restrictions help them sell more of their new cars, and they would of course help with political contributions. The U.S. is $31 trillion in debt. It could be time to start thinking real hard about not throwing away useful vehicles, or useful anything. Have you ever heard an analogy of how much a trillion is? The terms "million", "billion, and "trillion" tend to run together in peoples minds. Try this analogy - you've probably never seen it before since I came up with it my own self. Picture, if you will, small stones, gravel. Average about 3/4 inch in diameter. 1000 pieces of this size gravel will fit in an area 1 foot square, 4 inches thick. Multiply that by 1000 to get a million, 1000 square feet is about as big as a good sized 2 car garage. 1000 good sized 2 car garages equals an area about the size of 16 football fields. That's as big as a really huge factory warehouse. So that big of an area, covered in small gravel 4 inches thick, equals one billion stones. 1000 x 16 football fields? I figured it years ago, might have screwed it up, but as I remember that equals an area about the size of the state of Maine. I'm no financial expert, but this kind of U.S. debt can't keep growing indefinitely without an economic meltdown, it just can't. And that meltdown will happen a lot sooner than a climate change meltdown. Democrats in congress just passed, with the sig of our climate change loving president, a 1.7 trillion dollar bill. Nothing but debt to pay for it. It's loaded with pork. Some of that pork is a "hip hop" (gay) museum in the Bronx, and a $3.6 million hiking trail named after Michelle Obama. A LOT of fossil fuel will be used in the construction of those two things alone. Democrats don't always worry much about climate change, do they?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
DWise1 writes:
Couldn't you summarize it, condense it, and post it here rather than just saying to read an entire book? Bob Altemeyer constructed a Right-Wing Authoritarian (RWA) spectrum with sets of survey questions to place an individual on that scale. Also, "right wing" has nothing to do with politics, since even an extreme left-wing mentality could score high on the RWA scale. Already done in my Message 219 where I had recommended to Phat that he read that excellent book in order to finally learn what authoritarianism actually is. He keeps using that word but I don't think it means what he thinks it means. Since you are expressing refusal to follow a link, here is that Message 219 (including the link for the free copies):
DWise1 writes: [to Phat:] You keep misrepresenting what authoritarianism is. Please learn what it actually is. Bob Altemeyer is a now-retired psychology professor who specialized in authoritarianism. Most of his papers used a lot of math and statistical analysis, so he wrote his book, The Authoritarians, in a form that is much more accessible to the average reader. He also made it as freely available as possible (at the link I just provided). I have the PDF edition, but it's also in a few e-Reader formats as well as audio. It's an interesting and fairly easy read. A word of advice about reading it: READ THE FOOTNOTES. Some of the most interesting information is in the footnotes, despite his self-deprecating comments about how masochistic you would need to be to read the footnotes. Please do most definitely add this to your reading list. In 2020, Altemeyer co-authored a book with John Dean (of Watergate infamy), Authoritarian Nightmare. When he wrote The Authoritarians in 2006, "Dubya" Bush was the worst US president he had ever seen. Now that distinction goes to Trump. Another book to add is Timothy Snyder's On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. How long is the set of survey questions, couldn't you show us? I had mentioned that in order to emphasize that it's not a starkly binary black-or-white authoritarian/non-authoritarian, but rather a spectrum of how authoritarian one could be (IOW, lots of gray). Hence you have high-RWAs (right wing authoritarians) and low-RWAs and lots of those who are in-between (and he found that our scores change over time). You already have your link to your very own free copy so you are fully capable of reading them for yourself. The first one measures one's RWA score while the other questionnaires determine one's beliefs, value systems, etc, which Altemeyer could then correlate with RWA scores (all his published papers were thick with statistical analysis, which is why he wrote this book):
There, I've done enough of your work for you. All of which is pearls cast before swine (ie, you) since you will never bother to act on that bibliography, so why should I even bother? Because others can read it and benefit from having done so. But since you will refuse to go read it for yourself, here's the first questionnaire from pages 10-14:
quote: So, how did you score?
Is the book only about Trump and January 6th? Bob Altemeyer wrote the book in 2006, so what do you think? Try not to strain your brain on that trick question. As I did clearly state in Message 219 (reposted above):
DWise1 writes: In 2020, Altemeyer co-authored a book with John Dean (of Watergate infamy), Authoritarian Nightmare. When he wrote The Authoritarians in 2006, "Dubya" Bush was the worst US president he had ever seen. Now that distinction goes to Trump. That new book does deal with Trump, though they had submitted the manuscript to the publisher on 26 Jun 2020 and Altemeyer's review of theirs and other books about the Trump Administration was written on 08 Oct 2020 (before the election, even). BTW, that link to Authoritarian Nightmare takes you to that review. I haven't read the latest book yet, but I'm sure that it analyzes some of the MAGAt dumbfuckery that keeps getting ever worse. BTW, it was John Dean who in 2006 urged Altemeyer to write The Authoritarians; read the Acknowledgements.
Does it contain an LWA spectrum also? That is a most incredibly stupid and ignorant question. There's no such thing as a "LWA spectrum"! Please make an enormous life-style change and learn something about what you're pontificating about! You will be amazed at how much good it will do you to know what you are talking about. What did I already tell you (which you even went so far as to quote in your "reply"!)? Yet again, not as if you would bother to read it:
DWise1 writes: Bob Altemeyer constructed a Right-Wing Authoritarian (RWA) spectrum with sets of survey questions to place an individual on that scale. Also, "right wing" has nothing to do with politics, since even an extreme left-wing mentality could score high on the RWA scale. Also above in this reply:
DWise1 writes: I had mentioned that in order to emphasize that it's not a starkly binary black-or-white authoritarian/non-authoritarian, but rather a spectrum of how authoritarian one could be (IOW, lots of gray). Hence you have high-RWAs (right wing authoritarians) and low-RWAs and lots of those who are in-between (and he found that our scores change over time). It's called the RWA spectrum because that's what it measures. And as Altemeyer explains himself, it has absolutely nothing to do with politics (except that MAGAts and other Republicans tend to be high-RWA and Democrats low-RWA). As Bob Altemeyer himself wrote (starting on page 9):
quote: Are you starting to understand now? For the benefit of those who do decide to read the book (which you would never consider), read the footnotes! Even though he calls you masochistic for doing so, some of the best and most interesting material is in the footnotes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.4
|
Marc9K writes:
WHAT!!! so now decades of NASA data from satellites is a "special interest"? Nasa is a special interest. It absorbs billions from the federal government each year. It also accepts donations. It's one of many special interests that can increase its cash flow using climate change hysteria.
Ladies and gentlemen, here is Exhibit A-1 of how woefully inadequate our education system is. Poor Marc has never learned anything useful beyond the 3rd grade.
Why is your small intake valve focused only on the U.S.? Because that's where I live, currently the biggest threat to the U.S. way of life is from within - the Democrat party. And it's $31+ trillion in debt.
Exhibit A-2. Poor Marc thinks the Democrats are threatening his U.S. way of life and stealing gobs of money, probably HIS MONEY!! Build a giant wall around the rest of the world to shield him from climate change!!!! The RWA brainwashing is so total.
Have you checked the more realistic and verifiable size of the USA on a globe lately? I bet you might even think eye-witness testimony is the best kind of evidence of these public local records. ?? Could you repeat that in English?
Naw. You're too dumb to understand anyway.
Taq writes: Why can't governments use laws to encourage the replacement of fossil fuels? Why won't this help? xongsmith writes: I do NOT see the Democrats in that quote. Not in gun control? Not in the Green New Deal?
WTF? "Democrat" does not appear in your quoted line from Taq, you fool. You must think "governments using laws" means "Democrats ruling against me" or something. SMH SMH SMH then after he presents his little 3rd grade "Nobody ever thought of this before" Trumpian Stroke of Genius Orders-of-Magnitude story, he ends with
Democrats in congress just passed, with the sig of our climate change loving president, a 1.7 trillion dollar bill. Nothing but debt to pay for it. It's loaded with pork. Some of that pork is a "hip hop" (gay) museum in the Bronx, and a $3.6 million hiking trail named after Michelle Obama. A LOT of fossil fuel will be used in the construction of those two things alone. Democrats don't always worry much about climate change, do they? indicating that he still doesn't understand orders-of-magnitude, and also has overtones of overt racism running around in his body. But there are too many issues inside Marc9K to address here in EvC and I hope he gets therapeutic help soon before he goes postal."I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Actually, I have read that book, but not in some time.
Need I defend myself, I am not an extreme Right Winger politically. I never liked Trump, although ringo accuses me of following in his footsteps. For the record, I am pro-private property rights, and pro-business over government monopoly of technology(I know that you were ex-military and so can see the other side of that argument) You all might be interested in my recent topic: Message 1The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Democrats should not be the only party. Respect the two-party system. -Phat, in December 2022 We see Monsters where Science shows us Windmills.~Phat, remixed
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0
|
marc9000 writes:
Oil is a substance. It's a lubricant, it's needed in the manufacture of rubber and plastic products, and has many other uses, it's not only burned for energy. Nuclear and fission and all of that are just energy, not physical substances.Taq writes: I think what marc9000 is trying to say is that he opposes "the government" shutting down the oil and gas industry so rapidly when the US still needs oil on many other levels than simply burning it for energy. BURNING FOSSIL FUELS IS THE PROBLEM? Understand?The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Democrats should not be the only party. Respect the two-party system. -Phat, in December 2022 We see Monsters where Science shows us Windmills.~Phat, remixed
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0
|
xongsmith, addressing marc9K writes: Again, looking at it from what I think marc9K's view is, we are worried that an overzealous government, acting "for the good of the people", is destroying the oil and gas industry and that the issue is not so much about fossil fuels. We realize that fossil fuel needs will and even *should* be downsized. We are more concerned with the government's authoritarian mandate to shut down the "fossil fuel" industry too rapidly. As marc has tried to point out, this industry is involved in a lot more industries than simply gasoline and heating oil. Big government has no power to change and shape society without the private industries which gave the nation its power in the first place. i think the changes to renewable energies will take time and the CEOs who haven't already built up stockpiles of alternate stocks will go the way of the horse and buggy whip industry.The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Democrats should not be the only party. Respect the two-party system. -Phat, in December 2022 We see Monsters where Science shows us Windmills.~Phat, remixed
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined:
|
Too rapidly? Ha! If you step back and look at it we are way, way to slow to stop burning fossil fuels. After the catastrophic climate effects we are having we have been killing millions every year through the crap pumped into the air.
If you don't think that is dangerous then take Arnold Schwartzenegger challenge and pick the garage with the ICE vehicle running in it. You along with all of us are in the one garage we have. "Authoritarian"? Rules are needed when the oil giants have been deliberately spreading misinformation after knowing for decades there is a problem. It's the same reason we need to lock up serial killers. We left getting on with it about a generation too long so now the disruption and difficulty will be greater than it had to be. Leaving it any longer will only make the pain that much greater.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
marc9000 writes:
I gave you examples in the post you are quoting Message 44. You said, "Fossil fuels are voluntarily purchased by people who desire to have them." and I replied that so are drugs, explosives and poison gasses. All of them are voluntarily purchased by people who desire to have them. All of them have had laws passed against them. What kind of laws would you suggest?
ringo writes:
EXAMPLES? Legislators have already suggested them, already debated them and already passed them. To spell it out for you, laws don't prevent people from doing what they want to do.
marc9000 writes:
See above. So climate change laws have been passed, and our troubles are over?Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Yes you are. You agree with the extreme right-wingers on everything.
I am not an extreme Right Winger politically. Phat writes:
Go ahead and SHOW us that you disagree with right-wing extremists.
I never liked Trump, although ringo accuses me of following in his footsteps. Phat writes:
Page one of the right-wing extremist handbook (written in pictures like a Chick tract). I am pro-private property rights, and pro-business over government monopoly of technology... And "government monopoly of technology" is a right-wing extremist slogan, like "the Jews are conspirong to set up a New World Order".Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
Actually, I have read that book [ie, The Authoritarians], but not in some time. Then you need to reread those parts that you have completely forgotten; eg:
I have to run some errands so I have to cut this short. The point still remains that almost everything you have been writing tells us that you either have completely forgotten what you had learned from The Authoritarians ... or else you had never learned anything in the first place. I'll repost from the book the world management simulation Altemeyer's son was involved in, so Altemeyer used game applicants' RWA scores to have one run staffed with high-RWAs and a second with low-RWAs (time's tight, so I must forego inserting formatting markup codes):
quote: You have recently advocated the high-RWA approach to running the global economy ("competition over cooperation"). Now you have seen the consequences of what you are asking for.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024